Help with 4141

[Mark18]

I'm playing as Man City. I am using a 4-1-4-1

First, do you think 4-1-4-1 is a good formation for attacking? I am not playing 4-1-2-3 because Aml and Amr aren't defensive enough.

2nd, here is my setup: 

                                                                                              Dlf - Su (slo)

 

Wm - At (All raudmeter instructions)   Dlp - Su (more risky passes)   Mez - at (slo)      W - Su (slo)

                                                                                  Dm - De (slo)

Fb - Su (stay wider)             Cd - st (fewer risky passes)    Bpd - De (pass it shorter)     Wb - At (slo)

                                                                            Sk -su(pass it shorter, distribute to center backs)

 

TIs - Play out of defense, pass into space, low crosses, work ball into box, close down more, prevent short gk distribution

Slo - shoot less often

 

 

Should I set my right WB to support? And are there any other suggestions you have?

I know it'd be better if I posted a screenshot but I can't access the computer right now and I am typing this on phone.

                                                      

                                                  

[westy8chimp]

6 hours ago, Mark18 said:

I am not playing 4-1-2-3 because Aml and Amr aren't defensive 

This isnt strictly true... Even a striker can be considered defensive, given the right settings and the context of where you want to win the ball. 

Im going to complete my thread today, had a very successful season playing with 4 across the AM strata... High possession, good results, not many conceded. 

For you i take it what you are really getting at is you are perhaps a midtable or weaker side and you think a lower block is more advantageous to your formation? It could well be. 

But dont rule anything out based on the idea that you can only defend from deep positions. If the AI play wbr and amr your mr is marking no one for instance...so is either being pulled out to close down the wb leaving space behind, or is dropping deep to double up on the amr.... Leaving a marauding wb free

[Mark18]

2 hours ago, westy8chimp said:

This isnt strictly true... Even a striker can be considered defensive, given the right settings and the context of where you want to win the ball. 

Im going to complete my thread today, had a very successful season playing with 4 across the AM strata... High possession, good results, not many conceded. 

For you i take it what you are really getting at is you are perhaps a midtable or weaker side and you think a lower block is more advantageous to your formation? It could well be. 

But dont rule anything out based on the idea that you can only defend from deep positions. If the AI play wbr and amr your mr is marking no one for instance...so is either being pulled out to close down the wb leaving space behind, or is dropping deep to double up on the amr.... Leaving a marauding wb free

I am using Man City. I'll try and push the AML and AMR up.

 

Thanks

[summatsupeer]

Any formation can be good at attacking if setup with a good combination of roles+duties and your defensive+attacking plans fit together.  Having said that I don't get what your trying to do.

You have a CM pair of DLP-S and MEZ-A whom you've told to both play Risky Passes Often.  You then tell your team to also Pass Into Space (the same thing).  But apart from your WM-A and the MEZ himself its quite a patient tactic with the DLF-S holding things up, W-S looking to collect to his feet and the double pivot (DLP-S + DM-D).  Especially when your WBIB and Play Out Of Defence, plus made your SK-S pass to the CBs, one whom doesn't play risky passes and the other who should do but you've told him to pass shorter.  Its like you want to patiently work the ball forward then expect a quick attack but you've pushed the opponents deep and let them get organized first so haven't exploited the space when you might of had it through quick transitions and then aren't patient to create space.

 

[okereke]

hace 4 horas, summatsupeer dijo:

Any formation can be good at attacking if setup with a good combination of roles+duties and your defensive+attacking plans fit together.  Having said that I don't get what your trying to do.

You have a CM pair of DLP-S and MEZ-A whom you've told to both play Risky Passes Often.  You then tell your team to also Pass Into Space (the same thing).  But apart from your WM-A and the MEZ himself its quite a patient tactic with the DLF-S holding things up, W-S looking to collect to his feet and the double pivot (DLP-S + DM-D).  Especially when your WBIB and Play Out Of Defence, plus made your SK-S pass to the CBs, one whom doesn't play risky passes and the other who should do but you've told him to pass shorter.  Its like you want to patiently work the ball forward then expect a quick attack but you've pushed the opponents deep and let them get organized first so haven't exploited the space when you might of had it through quick transitions and then aren't patient to create space.

 

I think this breakdown is spot on and exemplifies how lots of people have something in mind that they then can't correctly put in game language, falling into a mess of TIs and Pis that go against one another and contradict them. Once I learnt how to keep things simple and realized they worked better it's been wonderful to develop new ideas and systems.

[Mark18]

4 hours ago, summatsupeer said:

Any formation can be good at attacking if setup with a good combination of roles+duties and your defensive+attacking plans fit together.  Having said that I don't get what your trying to do.

You have a CM pair of DLP-S and MEZ-A whom you've told to both play Risky Passes Often.  You then tell your team to also Pass Into Space (the same thing).  But apart from your WM-A and the MEZ himself its quite a patient tactic with the DLF-S holding things up, W-S looking to collect to his feet and the double pivot (DLP-S + DM-D).  Especially when your WBIB and Play Out Of Defence, plus made your SK-S pass to the CBs, one whom doesn't play risky passes and the other who should do but you've told him to pass shorter.  Its like you want to patiently work the ball forward then expect a quick attack but you've pushed the opponents deep and let them get organized first so haven't exploited the space when you might of had it through quick transitions and then aren't patient to create space.

 

I changed things a bit.

I want them to attack in two ways. 

1st: Rpm or someone else finds IF -At and he then puts in a low cross for striker to finish, or the IF finishes it himself.

2nd: Ap (who is told to be more narrow and holds up ball) finds Wb - At who then puts in a cross.

 

Do you think this tactic is good to play that way?

 

[summatsupeer]

1 hour ago, Mark18 said:

I changed things a bit.

I want them to attack in two ways. 

1st: Rpm or someone else finds IF -At and he then puts in a low cross for striker to finish, or the IF finishes it himself.

2nd: Ap (who is told to be more narrow and holds up ball) finds Wb - At who then puts in a cross.

 

Do you think this tactic is good to play that way?

 

IF is told to cross less often and cut inside, he's also right footed and bad at crossing...

Then relying on the same thing from opposite flank is a bit one dimensional.  Oh and you've added Work Ball Into Box?  And after a slow tempo build up that will allow defences to get back and organized?  If your going to rely on crossing or a IF running in behind I wouldn't build up slowly.  If you want your players to be patient and let the RPM+AP work the ball around and create space that can work in a possession style system, but if players are just going to swing a cross in then they're not really being patient about it...

[Mark18]

28 minutes ago, summatsupeer said:

IF is told to cross less often and cut inside, he's also right footed and bad at crossing...

Then relying on the same thing from opposite flank is a bit one dimensional.  Oh and you've added Work Ball Into Box?  And after a slow tempo build up that will allow defences to get back and organized?  If your going to rely on crossing or a IF running in behind I wouldn't build up slowly.  If you want your players to be patient and let the RPM+AP work the ball around and create space that can work in a possession style system, but if players are just going to swing a cross in then they're not really being patient about it...

Sorry I am not sure I understand.

Are you saying I shouldn't use playmakers because they would ruin the counter attack by slowing the pace down?

Do you think I shouldn't have playmakers at all if I want to achieve the fast attacks?

 

Thanks

[summatsupeer]

1 hour ago, Mark18 said:

Sorry I am not sure I understand.

Are you saying I shouldn't use playmakers because they would ruin the counter attack by slowing the pace down?

Do you think I shouldn't have playmakers at all if I want to achieve the fast attacks?

 

Thanks

If you want fast attacks, why are you using Lower Tempo, Play Out Of Defence and Work Ball Into Box on Standard mentality? 

Regardless of roles that is a more patient style that will allow opponents to get back and organized.  Your AP will because you told him to Hold Up Ball but they don't usually.  A deep runner isn't really a fast attack movement as he has to come from deep so again gives opponents time to get back compared to a early runner from higher up the field.  Thats not to say it isn't a good movement, especially in a 2nd phase if the initial attack doesn't work.

[Experienced Defender]

If you want to create a good counter-attacking tactic with Man City in a 4-1-2-3 formation, maybe you could try something like this:

mentality - attacking

shape - highly structured

d-line - slightly deeper

pressing - close down less

tempo - normal

team passing - direct

width - fairly narrow

low crosses

be more expressive

(optionally - pass into space)

Player's roles and duties:

DLP (att) or F9

IF (sup)                                                                                              W (sup)

MEZ (att)                                      BTBM

ANCHOR (or BMW def)

WB (sup)             DCL (def)               DCR (def)             FB (att)

SK (sup)

 

I believe players such as City's should be capable of putting this somewhat tricky tactic into effect.